Japanese Court Rules Apple Does Not Infringe on Samsung Patents

A Japanese court ruled today that Apple's iPhone 4s, iPhone 4 and iPad 2 do not infringe on Samsung's data communication patents, reports Bloomberg. Tokyo District Court Judge Koji Hasegawa handed down the decision in the infringement case, which was originally filed by Samsung in April 2011.

Samsung said in a statement emailed to Bloomberg that it was disappointed by the decision and may consider an appeal, while Apple has not yet commented on the ruling.

“We are disappointed by the court’s decision,” Samsung said in an e-mailed statement earlier today. “Upon a thorough review of the ruling, we will determine which measures to take, including an appeal.”

This is one of several patent infringement lawsuits filed by the two technology giants in recent years. Apple scored the biggest win when it was awarded $890 million in a high-profile case that was presided over by Judge Lucy Koh in the United States District Court in the Northern District of California.

A second U.S. patent infringement lawsuit is set to begin on March 31, with Apple seeking up to $40 per unit in damages if Samsung is found guilty of infringing all five of Apple's software patents.

Top Rated Comments

Blaming the system is Verdict 101 :confused: Every company releases similar statements - Apple included - when the courts aren't in their favor.

Yes, but my point is that this is not really face saving. Maybe once, but how many losses can be blamed on a system. That is why I was suggesting that it is time to go away from 101 and graduate to 301 -- the art mediation, negotiation and compromise. If the two wanted, they could make a deal an solve all the silliness. The bigger problem is that with each loss, Samsung loses leverage for negotiation, so the long they wait, the worse off their terms will be in any eventual deal.

I can imagine $40 per device would be a big winner for Apple and a very large annoyance for Samsung :p

Even Mueller at Foss Patents... who is usually pro-Apple... has said himself, and quoted other experts, that the $40 claim just makes Apple look ridiculous. As he put it not long ago (http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/03/at-upcoming-trial-apple-wants-samsung.html):

"$40 per unit. For five software patents. Give me a break. Reality distortion would be a total understatement for this."

A request like that can backfire, too, if a judge decides that what's good for the goose, is good for the gander... and that Apple should pay more for others' patents.

Recently a similar thing happened (http://patentlyo.com/patent/2014/03/ongoing-against-willfulness.html) when Apple claimed that they could've easily programmed around a patent used in Facetime for just a few million dollars, and therefore should not have to pay a lot to use it.

After they lost the case, they flip-flopped and claimed that not using it would be incredibly disruptive and cost much more. The judge was not amused and increased the royalty rate he had already decided on, because it was clear that Apple suddenly considered the patents to be worth more.

It all depends on if they blatantly copied the feature, or if they accidentally infringed. There is a marked difference between the two, and the latter happens far more often than most people around here think.

Those who have followed this may remember the over 100 page comparative design analysis of the Samsung interface and iOS including suggested changes for Samsungs UI to become more iOS like.

No need. The iPod market share is a good example of what happens when competitors didn't copy.

That's a good indication, I agree. My reply to kdarling was just meant to point out that it's something that may be hard to prove, and is a very weak method to show that these feautures doesn't have value. Let's look at this from a different angle, if the features had no value, why did Samsung feel the need to copy the features to begin with.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.